Reprint  from  Industrial  World,  Pittsburgh,  March  24,  1913 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  SMOKE  NUISANCE  AND  OF  SMOKE 

ABATEMENT  IN  PITTSBURGH 


Local  Archives  Show  Over  a Century  of  Intermittent  Agitation  Over  the  Smoke  Nuisance  — Early 
Narratives  of  Travelers — Part  Played  by  Engineers’  Society  of  Western  Pennsylvania — The  Les- 
son Natural  Gas  Taught — A Forgotten  Ordinance. 

0 

By  John  O’Connor,  Jr.,  Economist, Smoke  Investigation  Staff,  Department  of  Industrial  Research,  University 
of  Pittsburgh;  Secretary  of  the  Smoke  and  Dust  Abatement  League  of  Pittsburgh. 


rflHE  story  of  the  Smoke  Nuisance  in 
Pittsburgh  is  the  old  and  oft-told  story 
which  runs  through  the  history  of  Am- 
erican municipalities.  It  is  the  story 
of  rapid  growth  in  population  and  in- 
dustrial activity,  marked  by  wastefulness 
of  natural  resources,  carelessness  in  re- 
gard to  the  future,  indifference  to  many 
of  the  precious  things  of  life,  and  a blind 
opposition  toward  anything  which  seems 
to  threaten,  in  even  a remote  way  that 
which  is  termed  “Prosperity." 

When  the  story  is  told  for  Pittsburgh 
it  is  told  for  most  of  the  cities  of  the 
country,  for  Pittsburgh,  with  its  sobri- 
quet, “The  Smoky  City,”  has  stood  as 
the  shining  example  of  the  Smoke 
Nuisance.  Because  of  its  wonderful  in- 
dustrial development  and  because  of  the 
black  smoke  which  seemed  to  follow, 
Pittsburgh  has  done  more  than  any 
other  city  on  the  globe  to  make  smoke 
and  prosperity  synonymous  in  the  minds 
of  a great  host  of  people  who  are  seem- 
ingly indifferent  to  the  truth  of  the  whole 
problem. 

The  history  of  the  Smoke  Nuisance 
dates  from  the  very  beginning  of  the 
city.  Tradition  has  it  that  coal  was 
burned  in  Fort  Duquesne  by  the  French. 
As  this  coal  was  from  the  Pittsburgh 
vein,  which  is  so  rich  in  volatile  matter, 
and  as  it  was  burned,  no  doubt,  as  a 
great  part  of  it  is  burned  to-day,  it  is 
safe  to  assume  that  there  was  black 
smoke  about  the  Fort  in  even  its  earli- 
est days.  The  Rev.  Charles  Betty,  who 
was  chaplain  of  the  English  forces  which 
occupied  the  Fort  in  1758,  noted  that  coal 
was  used  in  the  garrison  in  1766.  In  that 
year,  what  was  known  as  “Coal  Hill,” 
now  Mount  Washington,  took  fire  and  it 
is  said  to  have  burned  steadily  for  six- 
teen years. 

A Town  Problem  110  Years  Ago. 

That  official  cognizance  was  early 
taken  of  the  Smoke  Nuisance  is  indi- 
cated in  the  following  communication  of 
General  Presley  Neville,  the  burgess  of 
Pittsburgh,  to  George  Stevenson,  the 
president  of  council.  The  letter  is  dated 
June  10,  1804.  It  reads  in  part: 

The  general  dissatisfaction  which  pre- 
vails and  the  frequent  complaints  which 


are  exhibited,  in  consequence  of  the  -Coal 
Smoke  from  many  buildings  in  the  Bor- 
ough, particularly  from  Smithies  and 
Blacksmith  Shops,  compels  me  to  ad- 
dress you  on  this  occasion.  I would  be 
extremely  sorry  to  be  in  any  -way  the 
means  of  subjecting  any  of  our  fellow- 
citizens  to  unnecessary  or  useless  ex- 
pense, but  in  this  instance  not  only  the 
comfort,  health  and  in  some  measure  the 
consequence  of  the  place,  but  the  peace 
and  harmony  of  the  inhabitants  depend 
upon  the  speedy  measures  being  adopt- 
ed to  rernedr'  the  nuisance. 

The  burgess  went  on  to  suggest  high- 
er chimneys  by  which  “the  smoke  could 
be  voided  into  free  air  and  carried  be- 
yond the  limits  of  the  borough.” 

This  letter  sounds  very  much  like  one 
that  could  be  written  some  109  years 
later.  I dare  say  that  this  letter  has 
served  as  a model  for  the  communica- 
tions of  the  successors  of.  General  Nev- 
ille on  this  subject.  Perhaps  its  apolo- 
getic reference  to  “expense”  as  against 
“comfort  and  health”  accounts  for  the 
“speedy  measures”  which  have  been 
adopted  to  remedy  the  nuisance. 

A Reference  in  1807. 

As  even  to-day,  the  most  conspicuous 
feature  about  Pittsburgh  in  its  early  days 
was  its  smoke.  In  Cumming’s  Sketch  of 
a Tour,  written  in  1807,  there  is  this  ob- 
servation on  Pittsburgh : “The  great 
consumption  of  coal  abounding  in  sul- 
phur, and  its  smoke  condensing  into  a 
vast  quantity  of  lamp  black,  gives  the 
outside  of  the  houses  a dirty  and  dis- 
agreeable appearance,  even  more  than 
the  most  populous  town  of  Great  Britain 
where  a proportional  great  quantity  of 
coal  is  used.” 

It  is  a well  known  fact  that  Pittsburgh 
so  resembled  certain  cities  of  England  in 
its  industries  and  appearance  that  locai 
sections  were  called  Birmingham  and 
Manchester.  -Charles  Dickens,  comment- 
ing on  this  resemblance  in  his  Amer- 
ican Notes,  said:  “It  (Pittsburgh)  cer- 
tainly has  a great  quantity  of  smoke 
hanging  about  it.” 

Zadock  Cramer  in  the  Navigator,  1808, 
wrote  of  Pittsburgh : “On  entering  the 
town  one  is  rather  offended  with  its 
dark  and  heavy  appearance.  This  arises 
from  the  smoke  of  coal,  which  is  used 


as  a common  fuel,  and  of  which  about 
170,000  bushels,  are,  consumed  annually. 
It  costs  six  cents  a bushel  at  your  door 
and  is  said  to  be  the  equal  of  any  in  the 
world.” 

“Tarnishes  Every  Object.” 

There  is  in  existence  a “Diary  of  a 
Journey”  by  a traveler  who  is  unknown 
because  the  title  page  of  the  diary  is 
missing.  The  date  of  it  is  probably  1818 
or  1819.  He  wrote:  “Pittsburgh  was 
hidden  from  view  until  we  descended 
within  a half  a mile  of  the  Allegheny 
river.  Dark,  dense  smoke  was  rising  from 
many  parts,  and  a hovering  cloud  of  thin 
vapor,  obscuring  the  prospect,  rendered 
it  singularly  gloomy.  Indeed,  it  remind- 
ed me  of  the  smoking  logs  of  a new 
field.  The  smoke  often  descends  in 
whirls  through  the  streets,  it  tarnishes 
every  object  to  which  it  has  access.  The 
gloomy  appearance  thus  imparted  to  the 
houses,  especially  to  tUose  of  wood, 
whether  painted  or  not,  is  such  as  in- 
stantly to  fix  the  attention  of  a stranger.” 

In  the  spring  of  1816,  one  David  Thom- 
as journeyed  across  the  Alleghenies  by 
stage  coach,  and  three  years  afterwards 
told  of  his  travels  in  a volume  entitled 
“Travels  in  the  Western  Country.”  Of 
Pittsburgh’s  coal  supply  he  wrote:  “The 
vast  advantages  that  accrue  to  this  place 
from  its  coal  will  be  appreciated  when 
we  consider  that  almost  every  manufac- 
ture owes  its  existence  to  this  article  of 
fuel.”  Of  the  smoke  that  came  from  the 
burning  of  this  fuel  he  remarked : 

The  clouds  of  smoke -are  an  all  pow- 
erful detriment  to  beauty.  * * * We  can- 
not conceive  that  the  exp-ensc  of  burn- 
ing gas  is  very  formidable,  and  until 
such  a regulation  be  adopted,  the  appli- 
cation of'all  bright  colors  to  the  external 
parts  of  the  buildings  should  be  deferred. 
1 am  assured  that  clothes,  sullied  before 
they  can  dry,  are  often  returned  to  the 
wash  tub  in  unfavorable  weather. 

In  1818,  Pittsburgh  was  visited  by  a 
quixotic  old  gentleman,  Eswick  Evans, 
who  wrote : “Owing  to  the  exclusive 
use  of  coal  here,  both  by  the  manufac- 
turers and  by  private  families,  the  whole 
town  presents  a smoky  appearance.  Even 
the  complexion  of  the  people  is  affected 
by  this  cause.”  He  was  not  the  first  to 


INDUSTRIAL  WORLD 


March  24,  1913 


note  this  point,  for  Major  Forman,  in  1789, 
spoke  of  the  coal  smoke,  saying  it  was 
such  as  to  “affect  the  skin  of  the  inhab- 
tants”;  and  Henry  Bradshaw  Fearon,  a 
London  surgeon  who  visited  Pittsburgh 
in  1817  wrote:  “The  smoke  is  extreme- 
giving  to  the  town  and  its  inhabitants  a 
very  sombre  aspect.” 

Early  Industries  and  Their  Fuels. 

The  smoke  of  Pittsburgh  has  always 
been  connected  in  a very  intimate  way 
with  its  iron  and  steel  industry.  The  first 
furnaces  of  the  iron  industries  were 
built  in  1792  at  what  is  now  Shadyside. 
The  fire  from  these  furnaces  lighted  up 
the  camps  of  those  who  in  1794  were  par- 
ticipants in  the  Whisky  Rebellion.  In 
1805  an  iron  foundry  was  built  on  the 
present  site  of  the  Park  building.  In 
melting  iron  ore,  charcoal  was  used  until 
1813  when  one  John  Beal,  who  had  late- 
ly come  from  England,  offered  through 
the  newspapers,  his  services  in  showing 
the  manufacturers  the  advantages  of 
coke.  Of  course,  the  making  of  coke 
for  this  purpose  only  increased  the 
smoke  in  the  city. 

During  the  early  years  of  the  city  the 
industries  which  depended  upon  cheap 
fuel  for  their  existence  grew  rapidly  in 
number  and  size.  In  1817  the  city 
council  took  a census  of  the  manufactur- 
ing concerns  and  found  that  there  were 
248.  James  Stuart,  a Scotch  traveler 
who  visited  Pittsburgh  in  1832  wrote  in 
“Three  Years  in  America”: 

Pittsburgh  is  well  known  as  the  great 
manufacturing  city  of  Western  America, 
and  would  be  a very  delightful  place  of 
residence,  but  for  the  clouds  of  coal 
smoke  which  cover  it  and  give  a 
gloomy  cast  to  the  beautiful  hills  which 
surround  it,  and  to  all  the  neighboring 
.country. 

If  we  follow  the  early  census  reports 
we  will  find  that  Pittsburgh’s  growth 
was  rapid  in  both  population  and  indus- 
try. In  1820  the  population  was  7,248. 
It  began  to  increase  at  the  rate  of  70 
per  cent  a decade.  In  1840  it  was  said 
that  the  prophecy,  “Pittsburgh  is  a man- 
ufacturing town  which  will  one  day  be- 
come the  Birmingham  of  America,”  was 
long  fulfilled.  Of  course,  in  those  days 
it  wrould  have  been  treason  to  suggest 
that  the  manufacturers  should  curtail 
the  emission  of  black  smoke.  The  con- 
nection between  smoke  and  prosperity 
was  becoming  fixed. 

James  Parton’s  Description. 

The  description  par  excellence  of 
Pittsburgh  and  its  smoke  was  given  to 
the  world  in  an  article  entitled  “Pitts- 
burgh,” by  James  Parton,  which  ap- 
peared in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  for  Jan- 
uary, 1868.  It  appears  that  James  Par- 
ton,  in  order  to  secure  his  material  foi 
this  article  visited  Pittsburgh  on  De- 
cember 6,  1866.  This  happened  to  be  one 
of  Pittsburgh’s  dark  days,  and  he  tells 


how  night  came  to  make  the  darkness 
natural  and  “the  streets  being  lighted, 
Pittsburgh  was  more  cheerful  than  it 
had  been  all  day.”  I should  judge  that 
this  article  stamped  Pittsburgh  for  all 
times  as  the  Smoky  City,  as  smoke 
seems  to  rise  from  every  page;  witness 
these  sentences  : “The  town  lies  low,  as 
at  the  bottom  of  an  excavation  just  vis- 
ible through  the  mingled  smoke  and 
mist  and  every  object  in  it  is  black. 
Smoke,  smoke,  smoke,  everywhere 
smoke.  * * * Everything  is  bought 

and  arranged  with  reference  to  the  ease 
with  which  its  surface  can  be  purified 
from  the  ever  falling  soot.” 

Anti-Smoke  Gospel  from  Birmingham. 

Dr.  William  J.  Holland,  the  director 
of  the  Carnegie  Museum,  tells  the  fol- 
lowing story  of  Pittsburgh  about  1878; 
“About  35  years  ago  the  Rev.  Leonard 
Woolsey  Bacon,  who  was  temporarily 
filling  the  pulpit  of  the  Third  Presbyter- 
ian Church  in  Pittsburgh,  having  come 
to  this  city  from  New  Haven,  appeared 
one  Monday  morning  at  the  door  of  my 
den,  looking  haggard,  tired  and  dirty. 
He  informed  me  that  he  had  passed  a 
doleful  night  at  the  Monongahela  house, 
and  on  arising  in  the  morning  had 
spent  a quarter  of  an  hour  in  trying  to 
cough  up  and  expectorate  a coal  mine 
which  had  lodged  in  his  air  passages. 
He  said  to  me,  with  a look  of  grim  de- 
termination on  his  face:  ‘I  am  going  to 
leave  the  town.  I have  brought  you 
three  pamphlets  which  I picked  up  in 
Birmingham,  England,  some  time  ago 
telling  how  to  cure  the  Smoke  Nuisance. 
I give  them  to  you  as  a young  man  who 
seems  to  be  determined  to  live  in  Pitts- 
burgh, and  I wish  to  say  that  there  is 
no  better  gospel  which  you  can  preach 
in  this  dirty  place  than  the  gospel  of 
pure  air  and  abatement  of  the  smoke 
nuisance.’  ” 

Part  Played  by  Natural  Gas. 

Pittsburgh  might  never  have  had  any 
smoke  abatement  agitation  if  it  had  not 
come  to  pass  that  the  city  was  practi- 
cally freed  from  smoke  by  the  discov- 
ery of  natural  gas  and  its  utilization  as  a 
fuel.  In  a report  made  to  the  Engineers’ 
Society  of  Western  Pennsylvania  in 
May,  1884,  there  was  this  statement : 
“Smoke  and  smoked  ceilings  of  Pitts- 
burgh may  become  things  of  the  past, 
yet  if  sold  at  the  price  now  charged, 
i.  e.,  50c  per  thousand  feet,  it  (natural 
gas)  is  much  more  costly  than  coal.”  At 
the  time  of  the  report,  natural  gas  was 
being  used  as  a fuel  in  the  Union  Iron 
Mills  and  the  Black  Diamond  Steel 
Works.  It  was  only  a short  time  until 
natural  gas  became  cheaper  than  coal 
and  came  for  the  time  being  to  supplant 
it  as  a fuel. 

Metcalf’s  Early  Efforts. 

However,  before  1885  Pittsburgh  be- 


came alive  to  at  least  the  question  of 
coal  economy.  In  1881,  William  Metcalf, 
an  eminent  engineer  and  mill  owner, 
read  a paper  before  the  Engineers’  So- 
ciety on  “Some  Waste  of  Heat.”  In  the 
introduction  to  his  paper  he  declared 
that  he  “proposed  to  show  by  figures  ob- 
tained from  actual  working  data,  how 
much  money  is  annually  thrown  away  in 
Allegheny  county  by  throwing  coal  into 
cur  furnaces  in  the  shape  of  coal,  to  be 
sent,  wasted,  out  at  the  tops  of  the 
stacks  in  the  shape  of  dirty,  useless 
smoke,  and  red  and  far  more  expensive 
flames.”  lie  estimated  the  cost  to  be 
$1,063,000. 

In  1884 -it  is  estimated  that  Pittsburgh 
was  using  annually  3,000,000  tons  of  bitu- 
minous coal.  With  the  introduction  of 
natural  gas  this  fell  off  to  less  than  1,- 
000,000  tons.  The  regime  of  natural  gas 
was  brief.  About  1890  the  coal  consump- 
tion again  began  to  move  upward  and  by 
1895  King  Coal  had  resumed  his  throne. 

Lesson  of  a Clean  City. 

But  Pittsburgh  knew  what  a clean  city 
was  like.  It  had  actually  been  experi- 
enced. It  was  only  natural  then  that  the 
people  protested  when  the  smoke  began 
to  increase.  The  question  was  taken  up 
the  Ladies’  Health  Association  of  Alle- 
gheny County.  The  prime  mover  in  this 
organization  was  the  late  Miss  Kate  C. 
McKnight,  who  was  very  active  in  civic 
work.  This  association  merged  with  the 
Civic  Club  of  Allegheny  County  when  it 
was  organized,  in  1895.  A committee 
from  the  health  association  was  present 
at  the  meeting  of  the  Engineers’  society 
in  February  of  1892  when  William  Met- 
calf, referred  to  above,  read  a paper 
which  was  a partial  defense  of  smoke.  In 
the  discussion  that  followed  this  paper 
one  of  the  speakers  said : 

“We  are  going  back  to  smoke.  We 
had  four  or  five  years  of  wonderful 
cleanliness  in  Pittsburgh,  and  we  have 
all  had  a taste  of  knowing  what  it  is  to 
be  clean.” 

At  the  March  meeting  of  the  Engi- 
neers’ society,  the  Ladies’  Health  Asso- 
ciation presented  its  side  of  the  story. 
The  result  was  that  the  engineers  ap- 
pointed a committee  on  Smoke  Preven- 
tion, which  reported  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  same  year. 

Action  by  Engineers’  Society. 

In  this  report  the  committee  recom- 
mended: (1)  That  the  Women’s  Health 
Protective  Association  or  some  similar 
organization,  continue  its  efforts  toward 
smoke  prevention  by  educating  the  com- 
munity in  its  principles  and  advocating 
the  use  of  smokeless  fuel  in  dwellings 
and  the  best  stokers  or  other  devices  in 
manufactories  and  steam  plants.  (2)That 
the  city  council  should  pass  an  ordinance 
for  the  abatement  of  the  Smoke  Nui- 


March  24,  1913 


INDUSTRIAL 


WORLD 


sance,  insisting  on  the  absence  of  dense 
smoke  from  stationary,  steamboat  and 
locomotive  boilers  except  when  fires  are 
started,  but  recognizing  the  necessity  of 
puddling  and  other  furnaces  which  re- 
quire a small  excess  of  carbon  for  proper 
working.  (3)  That  one  of  the  duties  of 
the  building  inspector  or  of  persons  ap- 
pointed for  the  purpose,  should  be  co 
see  that  the  newly  erected  buildings 
have  properly  designed  flues  and  ample 
room  for  furnaces  with  particular  refer- 
ence to  economical  combustion  and  the 
non-emission  of  smoke. 

First  City  Legislation. 

There  is  little  doubt  but  that  as  a re- 
sult of  the  agitation  on  the  part  of  the 
Ladies’  Health  Association,  and  because 
the  city  was  forced  to  give  up  the  use 
of  gas  in  the  pumping  stations  in  1891 
on  account  of  the  increased  price,  the 
city  councils  passed  the  first  general  or- 
dinance. The  word  “general”  is  used 
because  in  the  digest  of  the  ordinances 
of  Pittsburgh,  1804-1908,  there  is  recorded 
the  following  ordinance  : 

Section  2344 — No  bituminous  coal  or 
wood  shall  be  used  in  the  engine  or  any 
locomotive  employed  in  conducting 
trains  upon  any  railroad. 

The  code  in  which  this  ordinance  ap- 
pears was  formulated  in  1869.  so  this  or- 
dinance was  passed,  no  doubt,  shortly 
before  that  date.  It  is  said  that  it  has 
never  been  expressly  repealed  or 
amended. 

The  ordinance  of  March,  1892,  pro- 
vided that  after  September  1,  1892,  it 
should  be  unlawful  for  any  chimney  or 
smoke  stack  used  in  connection  with  a 
stationary  boiler  to  allow,  suffer  or  per- 
mit smoke  from  bituminous  coal  to  be 
emitted  or  escape  therefrom,  within  a 
certain  district.  This  district  was  bound- 
ed by  Miltenberger,  Dinwiddie,  Devil- 
liers  and  Thirty-third  streets  on  the  west 
and  the  city  line  on  the  east.  Its  north- 
ern and  southern  boundaries  were  ir- 
regular, being  arranged  according  to  the 
newspaper  “so  as  not  to  affect  a number 
of  iron  works,  steel  works,  oil  refineries 
and  other  industries  for  which  success- 
Vful  smoke  consuming  devices  have  not 
yet  been  provided.”  It  will  be  observed 
that  this  ordinance  excepted  the  business 
section  of  the  city,  bounded  by  Grant 
street,  the  Tenth  street  bridge  and  the 
two  rivers.  The  ordinance  was  chiefly 
notable  for  its  exceptions.  The  power 
of  enforcing  this  ordinance  was  placed 
in  the  hands  of  the  Department  of  Pub- 
lic Works. 

Bigelow’s  Early  Efforts. 

Edward  M.  Bigelow,  who  was  then  di- 
rector of  the  Department  of  Public 
Works,  assigned  the  duty  of  enforcing 
the  ordinance  to  the  superintendent  of 
the  Bureau  of  Water  Supply.  The  city 


decided  very  properly  to  clean  up  its 
own  stacks,  which  were  sending  forth 
black  smoke,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
give  a demonstration  of  what  might  be 
done  in  the  way  of  burning  bil/iminous 
coal  for  steam  making  purposes  without 
emitting  black  smoke. 

The  story  of  the  attempt  to  make  the 
Brilliant  pumping  station  smokeless  is  a 
most  instructive  one.  No  doubt  it  ex- 
plains why  plants  other  than  municipal 
ones  are  still  making  black  smoke.  At 
first  the  work  at  the  pumping  station 
was  pushed  with  vigor.  The  work  of  in- 
stalling stokers  was  started  in  1893.  In 
1894  the  superintendent  said  in  his  re- 
port: “None  of  the  smokeless  devices 
are  smokeless  except  under  favorable 
conditions.”  Mr.  Bigelow  was  more  op- 
timistic, for  in  his  report  for  that  year 
he  said:  “I  may  say  that  we  have  solved 
the  problem  of  smoke  prevention  at  the 
pumping  stations.”  In  1908  the  superin- 
tendent reported:  “We  have  continued 
our  efforts  to  prevent  an  unnecessary 
amount  of  smoke  at  this  station.” 

After  Twenty  Years. 

As  we  write  this  we  have  before  us 
the  1913  message  of  the  mayor  to  coun- 
cil in  which  he  says:  “Your  attention  is 
called  again  to  the  fact  that  one  of  the 
worst  offenders  against  the  smoke  ordi- 
nance is  the  city  of  Pittsburgh  at  the 
Northside  light  plant  and  the  Brilliant 
pumping  station.” 

In  May  of  1895  a second  smoke  ordi- 
nance was  passed.  This  ordinance  pro- 
vided in  Section  1,  that  the  emission  of 
more  than  20  per  cent  black  or  dark 
gray  smoke  from  any  stack  should  be 
considered  a public  nuisance.  Section  III 
provided  a fine  for  the  emission  of 
smoke  for  over  three  minutes.  The  de- 
cision of  the  Superior  Court  in  the  case 
of  Pittsburgh  vs.  W.  H.  Keech  Com- 
pany virtually  made  this  ordinance  in- 
operative. 

Enter  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

In  January,  1899,  President  Bindley, 
of  the  Chamber  of  Commerce,  appointed 
a Committee  on  Smoke  Abatement.  This 
appointment  was  no  doubt,  bought  about 
in  a measure  by  the  speech  of  Andrew 
Carnegie  at  the  annual  banquet  of  the 
Chamber  in  November  of  1898.  In 
speaking  of  the  Smoke  Nuisance  he  said: 
“We  all  know  that  many  of  our  citizens 
are  tempted  just  at  that  period  of  their 
lives  when  they  would  be  of  most  use 
to  our  city  in  furthering  the  things  of  a 
higher  order  to  leave  Pittsburgh  to  re- 
side under  skies  less  clouded  than  ours. 
The  man  who  abolishes  the  Smoke  Nui- 
sance in  Pittsburgh  is  foremost  of  us  all; 
to  him  be  assigned  first  place,  and  to 
him  let  our  deepest  gratitude  go  forth.” 

After  the  appointment  of  its  commit- 
tee, the  Chamber  of  Commerce  request- 


ed that  a committee  be  appointed  from 
the  Civic  Club  of  Allegheny  County  and 
from  the  Engineers’  society  to  co-oper- 
ate Avith  it.  While  the  Civic  Club  prompt- 
ly accepted  the  invitation,  the  Engineers’ 
society,  for  reasons  of  its  own,  with- 
held its  co-operation.  This  combined 
committee  reported  in  December  of  1899. 
Among  other  things  in  this  report,  it 
said : 

If  your  committee  believed  that  it  was 
not  practicable  to,  at  least,  greatly  di- 
minish the  Smoke  Nuisance  throughout 
the  commercial  and  residence  districts 
of  the  city,  it  would  frankly  say  so  and 
ask  for  summary  dismissal.  . . . The 
efforts  of  our  city  government  toward 
the  abatement  of  the  Smoke  Nuisance 
have  so  far  not  met  with  notable  suc- 
cess; a fact  chiefly  due  to  the  absence  of 
laws  for  the  enforcement  of  the  city  or- 
dinance for  this  purpose. 

The  committee  suggested  asking  the 
legislature  for  power  to.  compel  offend- 
ers to  comply  with  the  ordinance. 

Creating  a Smoke  Inspector. 

As  a result  of  the  work  of  this  com- 
mittee an  ordinance  was  passed  in  De- 
cember, 1906.  This  ordinance  held  the 
emission  of  dense  black  or  dense  gray 
smoke  for  more  than  eight  minutes  in 
any  one  hour  to  be  a nuisance  and  pre- 
scribed the  penalties  for  the  violation 
thereof.  However,  it  made  no  provis- 
ion for  the  enforcement  of  this  ordinance 
by  any  particular  bureau.  In  January 
of  1907,  council  passed  an  ordinance  in- 
troduced by  this  committee  creating  the 
office  of  Smoke  Inspector. 

At  the  request  of  Mayor  Guthrie  and 
in  recognition  of  the  efforts  of  this  com- 
mittee— this  being  prior  to  the  enact- 
ment by  the  Legislature  of  the  civil  ser- 
vice law — a civil  service  examination  was 
held  under  the  supervision  of  the  com- 
mittee to  secure  a man  fitted  to  take  the 
position  of  Smoke  Inspector.  William 
H.  Rea  was  selected  and  active  work 
was  begun  under  the  new  ordinance  in 
June,  1907.  The  administration  of  Mr. 
Rea  was  a very  efficient  one,  resulting  in 
a material  reduction  of  the  smoke  nuis- 
ance in  the  city. 

Thrown  Out  of  Court. 

In  1909  Mr.  Rea  resigned  and  J.  M. 
Searle  was  appointed  by  Mayor  Magee 
to  succeed  him.  On  March  3,  1911,  the 
ordinance  was  declared  void  in  the  case 
of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania 
versus  Standard  Ice  Company.  The 
grounds  of  this  decision  were,  first,  that 
the  Legislature  of  Pennsylvania  had 
likely  not  given  the  city  any  sufficient 
authority  to  pass  ordinances  upon  the 
subject  of  the  emission  of  smoke  and 
without  such  authority  the  city  could 
not  act — this,  however,  was  not  definite- 
ly ruled — and,  second,  that  the  ordinan- 
ces were  unreasonable.  On  June  6,  1911, 
the  Legislature  passed  an  act  authoriz- 


INDUSTRIAL  WORLD 


March  24,  1913 


ing  cities  of  the  second  class  to  regulate 
the  emission  of  smoke  and  in  Septem- 
ber, 1911,  a new  ordinance — the  present- 
one  with  one  modification,  that  of  the 
exception  of  mill  heating  furnaces  and 
puddling  furnaces — was  passed.  On  Sep- 
tember  22,  1911,  Mr.  Searle  resumed  his 
work  as  chief  smoke  inspector. 

At  the  present  time  Pittsburgh  is  most 
fortunate  in  the  strength  and  number  of 
che  forces  that  are  at  work  fighting  the 
smoke  nuisance,  so  that  at  last  the  solu- 
tion of  what  was  set  down  by  Dr. 
Holdsworth  in  the  Economic  Survey, 
as  “the  greatest  hindrance  to  Pitts- 
burgh’s economic  progress,”  is  within 
striking  distance. 

Present  Agencies. 

The  Industrial  Research  Department 
of  the  University  of  Pittsburgh  is  con- 
ducting an  investigation  into  every 
phase  of  the  Smoke  problem;  Pittsburgh 


is  the  home  of  the  United  States  Bureau 
of  Mines,  which  is  making  tests  of  the 
value  of  the  different  fuels  and  is  carry- 
ing^pn  investigations  to  ascertain  the 
conditions  of  furnace  construction  and 
management  that  are  necessary  to  in- 
sure the  smokeless  combustion  of  the 
different  coals;  the  city  smoke  inspec- 
tor in  his  report  for  1912  promised  to 
have  cleared  the  city  of  90  per  cent  of 
the  smoke  arising  from  industrial  plants 
by  the  end  of  the  year  1913  and  last,  but 
not  least,  the  civic  and  commercial  or- 
ganizations have  organized  a Smoke 
Abatement  League  in  order  that  they 
may  present  a solid  front  on  the  subject 
of  Smoke  Abatement. 

It  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  some 
time  in  the  very  near  future  Pitts- 
burgh’s smoke  nuisance  will  only 
be  a topic  for  such  a paper  as  this.  It 
will  be  a matter  of  history. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

History  of  Pittsburgh — Sarah  H.  Kill- 
ikelly. 

Old  Pittsburgh  Days — T.  J.  Chapman. 

Pittsburgh  and  Her  People — Edited 
by  J.  N.  Boucher. 

Pittsburgh  as  Seen  by  Early  Travel- 
ers— Monthly  Bulletins  of  Carnegie  Li- 
brary, April  1902 — June  1906. 

History  of  Pittsburgh — Edited  by 
Erasmus  Wilson. 

Proceedings  of  the  Engineers’  Society 
of  Western  Pennsylvania. 

Reports  of  the  Pittsburgh  DepaLment 
of  Public  Works. 

Annual  Reports  of  the  Pittsburgh 
Chamber  of  Commerce. 

Fifteen  Years  of  Civic  History.  A Re- 
port of  the  work  of  the  Civic  Club  of 
Allegheny  county. 


